Sanders Refuses to Address Latin American Socialist Failures on Univision

I know the first thing that's going to come slithering out of some of your keyboards is the tired-and-debunked-ad-nauseam deflection about the
type of socialism Sanders supports, namely that it isn't like Latin American models.

Which is total bulls#. Socialism has a core philosophy that is shared by all of it's various forms and through all of it's incarnations, including
that supported by Mr. Sanders--the "democratic" variety.

What I find most interesting about the following interview is that he doesn't take the opportunity to clarify how his model differs from Latin
American socialism, and instead refuses to address it at all:

LEÓN KRAUZE, UNIVISION: I am sure that you know about this topic: various leftist governments, especially the populists, are in serious
trouble in Latin America. The socialist model in Venezuela has the country near collapse. Argentina, also Brazil, how do you explain that failure?

BERNIE SANDERS: You are asking me questions…

LEÓN KRAUZE, UNIVISION: I am sure you’re interested in that.

BERNIE SANDERS: I am very interested, but right now I’m running for President of the United States.

LEÓN KRAUZE, UNIVISION: So you don’t have an opinion about the crisis in Venezuela?

BERNIE SANDERS: Of course I have an opinion, but as I said, I’m focused on my campaign.

I guess he doesn't understand how the political philosophies of our southern neighbors, and the impeding failures of the states ascribing to them,
could possibly affect the United States.

I'm thinking economics, immigration, security. Just off the top of my head. But I'm not as bright as ol' Bernie. He knows that even
acknowledging the evident hazards of socialism imperils his own flailing candidacy and the momentum of his greater cause. He knows better than to
call attention to it.

Is that why you think he didn't want to get into it? If it were me, I would take every opportunity to clear up misconceptions about my particular
brand.

After all, you take every such opportunity. I wonder why he didn't.

ETA: And I don't think the question was meant to conflate the Sanders Method with Latin failures, but perhaps was intended to simply glean insight
from a self-professed and highly influential socialist.

Again, I think there was a missed opportunity for clarification that would only make sense if he just simply didn't want to call any attention to the
matter.

The armed forces could be considered socialistic. All those toys don't come for free, neither do the campaigns that go on for decades and the military
bases and staff all over the world

All need to be paid for by society, for the "greater good". If you can spend money killing people you can spend money saving or healing people.
Depends on a societies priorities on how tax revenue is best spent

The armed forces could be considered socialistic. All those toys don't come for free, neither do the campaigns that go on for decades and the military
bases and staff all over the world

All need to be paid for by society, for the "greater good". If you can spend money killing people you can spend money saving or healing people.
Depends on a societies priorities on how tax revenue is best spent

I am trying to make sure I follow you... You think I defend some type of socialism, maybe every week, maybe rotating weeks, and change the type? I
am not such an expert in socialism that I could possibly do that.

Well yes, that's kind of like saying Trump is a conservative when really he's a nationalist. Yes i realize there are social programs and I don't have
many problems with them, I know as a civil society we cannot have people dying and starving in the street (though in some places we do) I also realize
that as technology advances we WILL progress towards a more socialistic society, and that is not a bad thing, but I also know at this juncture in time
we are not ready for such a monumental overhaul and that frankly our society has to come to grips with the divisive issues and make concessions and
focus on the real issues that need reform, for instance

Abuse of power ( stop the execution of both black and white citizens in situations that ultimately could of been prevented)

Mental illness ( de-stigmatizing and changing our understanding of these people effected in courts and in police action)

Legalization of drugs (take the criminal element out of a personal choice, and invest in more treatment centers)

Education ( get rid of the "zero tolerance policy's" stop pushing medicating on our boys, allow them to fight if they need to without there records
being completely destroyed, or being ostracized by the school and becoming a number in the system, reform the whole education system from the social
policy's to the curriculum)

Foreign policy ( reform the whole thing much like education, maintain as much of a non intervention policy as we can, but if we are to goto war we do
not destabilize the region by leaving in a quagmire, we truly nation build until it looks something like modern day japan or Germany so perhaps
perhaps that's a hundred year mission, and if we are not willing to do that then WE DON'T GO TO WAR and instead of spending 45k on that missile we
feed our homeless)

I could go on and on, but yes Bernie Sanders is too socialist for our nation in this day and age, and wouldn't win the election, that's my take, but
hey I could be wrong, i've been wrong before. Thanks for not letting me get off that easy

Bernie does not address the issues, because he is not a socialist. He is Social Democrat (Democratic Socialist). These are two extremely different
ideologies besides the fact that both contain the word "socialist".

originally posted by: JaMeDoIt
Check out Sanders on Bill Marr last night on HBO...Sanders talked about it.
Cheers

Thanks for mentioning this.

I am still on the fence as to Bernies 'democratic' socialism and how different it really is. Some members here pose some really good arguments in
favor of those differences. Bernie refusing to speak on this spoke poorly to me on this but perhaps it was more a cultural issue and him not wanting
to put his opinion where he felt it didn't belong?

Just speculating here, can't stand Maher these days but gonna check that episode out so I can see Sanders' explanation.

I would of liked to hear sanders positions on why they failed. It could have helped clarify his ideology for me. He may have upset his socialist
revolutionaries if he blamed s. american governments for distorting markets and prices he may have been more palatable.
It needs to be remembered that nordic countries despite some redistributionist policies have the highest private property rights indexes(above USA)

As for american police militarization. It's not great, I am guessing they see something in the future. Inner cities already need to be up armored. The
riot/looting/protest that has happened in certain places decimates those places long term. businesses, investments, and taxpayers leave. When the rule
of law/non aggression principle is not respected money leaves the area, see us inner cities.
Also american police are up armored because unlike a lot of other countries especially s. american countries it is very difficult to legally deploy
armed forces domestically, usually only state guards under state governors, no federal troops. see Posse Comitatus

It's not total BS to point out there's different models and degrees of Socialism. Regarding Latin Socialism... we have no idea what that actually
looks like so how can we judge it? The US doesn't let it happen as soon as a Populist or Socialist pops up we start fueling the opposition and if that
fails we back a coup. Maybe you should be voting for Hillary, she likes a good coup to overthrow a Socialist.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.